Page 1 of 1

[LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:49 am
by fabspro
Replay Link: https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=10188874
Game Name: [ENT] Legion TD Mega #33
Your Warcraft III Username: fabspro@uswest.battle.net
Violator's Warcraft III Username: zebrahead@europe.battle.net
Violated Rule(s): Refusing to cooperate by sending alone and not save-send with teammates to win.
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): Zebrahead began solo upgrading the king at about 14:00 without any team agreement. This was a refusal to save and send, which caused the team to lose the game. Then at level 13/14 because he had everyone on chat ignore, he refused to send level 13 after the send had been started, instead saying he would send 14 only.
Any further thoughts: Pink (Zebrahead) ignored people in chat and played essentially his own game, independently upgrading the king and dictating (too late to be followed) which waves to send to the team despite ignoring people in chat. This frustrated any attempt to coordinate a team send. A rough timeline of a particular issue was around level 13 where after many attempts to discuss team sends, nobody responded to me. So I had little choice but to send (the other team members were a newbie who was not talkative, and Zebrahead who had chat ignored me). Just after I had sent for 13, Zebrahead unignored me and said essentially "send 14 or i will report you and you will get banned". Zebrahead of course could have unignored me sooner, or he could have sent on 13 and we would have had a great team send. Food for thought.


Lack of cooperation and teamwork is exemplified by this:
Spoiler!
(11:08 / Allied) Zebrahead: !ignore fab

(24:08 / Allied) Zebrahead: !unignore fab
...
(24:45 / Allied) Zebrahead: 14
(24:52 / Allied) fabspro: if you had said that
(24:53 / Allied) fabspro: before i sent now
(24:55 / Allied) fabspro: then we could have saved
(24:58 / Allied) fabspro: i thought u had me ignored
(25:03 / Allied) Zebrahead: i did
(25:06 / Allied) fabspro: ok
(25:08 / Allied) fabspro: 15
(25:11 / Allied) Zebrahead: and i ll report you so badly
(25:12 / Allied) fabspro: too late to save for 14
(25:28 / Allied) fabspro: there's a lesson here
...
(25:34 / Allied) Zebrahead: !ignore fab


Ban re-posted for review as I disagree with AmroN's decision not to proceed with this ban, despite clear evidence rules were violated. Thanks.

Re: [LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:14 am
by Panopticon
For reference, this is the ban request that was denied by @AmnoM
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=122618#p476592

Re: [LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 11:42 am
by AmnoN
@fabspro I believe that I was pretty clear on why I denied the original ban. You are very toxic (I have seen a pattern of this in the two games that I have processed ban requests for) - the only person that pink ignored was you, same with green prior to the plug pull. It is you that needs an attitude adjustment to avoid these communication issues in future, (if pink did not have a good reason to ignore you, this may have been a bit different) and you decided to send without consulting the team - orange did not have you ignored.

Also, it is not wise to challenges every decision that does not go your way on the forums. You are welcome to ask for a second opinion, but I would not suggest doing so out of spite.

Re: [LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:13 pm
by fabspro
@AmnoN, I am only asking for a second review because it seems extraodinary to me that ignoring players is even really allowed in LTD, because players do have to work together to send. He ignored me because I called him out on his own violation of the save-send rule, which is not a good reason in my view.

Re: [LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 9:37 pm
by Panopticon
He ignored you because of your toxic attitude towards your own team in that game, not because of the reason you claim.

Re: [LTD] zebrahead@europe.battle.net

Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 9:15 pm
by Merex
Toxicity leads to being ignored. If it's an issue, then don't be toxic.

Ban request inconsistent, decision remains.